Article: Who were the "sons of God" in Genesis 6?

[Sojourner55]

I agree with Kahtar's point that, even conceding possession of a man's body by a fallen angel, the human sperm would presumably still be human--leaving unanswered, the question as to why their offspring would be so unusual.

With regard to angels "possessing" humans: I've pondered that in the past, but it seems to me, there is a distinction in the Bible between fallen angels and demons. In both the Hebrew and Greek texts, there is a marked difference in the concepts behind their root words. And, we still have the question, "if the fallen angels were consigned to the abyss, we have to wonder how they were still free to roam about and inhabit the bodies of people in Jesus' day?"

There is a traditional belief among some Bible scholars that demons are the disembodied spirits of fleshly beings who inhabited the earth prior to the creation of man--perhaps having died in a deluge similar to that in the time of Noah. This, the theory goes, explains why the earth was covered in water prior to its restoration, as described in Genesis 1).

We must tread lightly when speculating about Biblical matters, especially when lacking sufficient corroboration. Yet, the idea of evil spirits taking control of living bodies, lends merit to the idea that they once had one had one of their own. (I know I'm digressing, but this matter does come to bear on the study). This question is wide open, but what Scriptural evidence do we have that suggests angelic possession, in the sense of demonic possession? Or is there evidence to support the idea that the two spirit beings are one and the same?

[Kahtar]

With regard to angels "possessing" humans: I've pondered that in the past, but it seems to me, there is a distinction in the Bible between fallen angels and demons. In both the Hebrew and Greek texts, there is a marked difference in the concepts behind their root words. And, we still have the question, "if the fallen angels were consigned to the abyss, we have to wonder how they were still free to roam about and inhabit the bodies of people in Jesus' day?"

I agree that there is a distinction. Being (mostly) an 'angel theory' proponent, it is my understanding that the demons are the disembodied spirits of the nephilim, the offspring, this disembodiment being the result of being half-angel. Pure speculation though of course. As to the angels being consigned to the abyss, we are not told when that consignment occurred. If this whole sons of God thing is fallen angels mating with human women, then from scripture we must conclude that it took place both before and after the flood, and that either the same angels did it after the flood before they were consigned to the abyss, or another set of fallen angels committed the same act, with undoubtedly the same consignment.

There is a traditional belief among some Bible scholars that demons are the disembodied spirits of fleshly beings who inhabited the earth prior to the creation of man--perhaps having died in a deluge similar to that in the time of Noah. This, the theory goes, explains why the earth was covered in water prior to its restoration, as described in Genesis 1).

This one presents the problem of Adam's fall affecting all humanity, and bringing death into the picture. If others existed, this could not be true.

We must tread lightly when speculating about Biblical matters, especially when lacking sufficient corroboration.

Yepper. Keep it at the forefront that we are speculating.

[Sojourner55]

I agree that there is a distinction. Being (mostly) an 'angel theory' proponent, it is my understanding that the demons are the disembodied spirits of the nephilim, the offspring, this disembodiment being the result of being half-angel. Pure speculation though of course.

Hmm...I somehow never made that connection, speculation or not.

If this whole sons of God thing is fallen angels mating with human women, then from scripture we must conclude that it took place both before and after the flood, and that either the same angels did it after the flood before they were consigned to the abyss, or another set of fallen angels committed the same act, with undoubtedly the same consignment.

Couldn't the nephilim existing after the Flood simply be a residual effect from the gene pool of Noah's wife or daughters-in-law? Even if Noah's genes were okay, we could still see a mutation being passed from the cursed Canaan via Ham's wife, since most of the Canaanite people were his descendants, including the giants.

"There is a traditional belief among some Bible scholars that demons are the disembodied spirits of fleshly beings who inhabited the earth prior to the creation of man--perhaps having died in a deluge similar to that in the time of Noah. This, the theory goes, explains why the earth was covered in water prior to its restoration, as described in Genesis 1)."

This one presents the problem of Adam's fall affecting all humanity, and bringing death into the picture. If others existed, this could not be true.

Unless we take the position that humanity started with Adam, and the disembodied spirits were something other than human that originally inhabited the earth. I've often wondered why evil spirits are always represented as animals. The Hebrew root for "devil" (demon) is in fact, based on the concept of a hairy creature like a he-goat; the symbol for Satan among satanists is a goat; the spirit-possesed antichrist and false prophet are called "beasts," and the three spirits coming out of them and the the dragon, are mysteriously likened to "frogs." Kind of adds a different perspective to the talking serpent in the garden. There's just so little to go on, yet such tantalizing tidbits of information.

[Kahtar]

Couldn't the nephilim existing after the Flood simply be a residual effect from the gene pool of Noah's wife or daughters-in-law? Even if Noah's genes were okay, we could still see a mutation being passed from the cursed Canaan via Ham's wife, since most of the Canaanite people were his descendants, including the giants.

Yes, that is a possibility. Noah's generations were not corrupted, but it says nothing of his wife's or his daughter in law's. And you are correct, it was Ham/Canaan descendants that the nephilim reappear.

Unless we take the position that humanity started with Adam, and the disembodied spirits were something other than human that originally inhabited the earth.

Interesting thought. One thing we do know. The demons did Satan's bidding.

There's just so little to go on, yet such tantalizing tidbits of information.

Yep. Just enough to 'hang a carrot' before us and keep us digging.

[Diggindeeper]

I have to say I stand here with Kahtar.

I do offer that I don't believe the same thing had to happen again AFTER the flood. I do know that we have no way of knowing anything about the lineage line of Noah's 3 daughters-in-law, and a carefully researched study of the lineage lines DOES show that all the giants that showed up after the flood came through Ham's line!

Also, in the Bible, the Promised land was said to be the 'land of the giants'!

Verses in Deuteronomy Amos and other places state the SIZE of those giants. The fact is, or it seems to me, when the spies came back and said, "We are like grasshoppers beside them..." they were being very serious.(If anyone wants a list of the scriptures concerning the 'size' of the giants, or that the Promised land WAS called 'the Land of the Giants', I'll be glad to pass them along, maybe in a PM so as not to take up too much room in the Articles forum.)

But, I do definitely lean towards the 'fallen angel' explanation.

[Sojourner55]

I have to say I stand here with Kahtar.

I do offer that I don't believe the same thing had to happen again AFTER the flood. I do know that we have no way of knowing anything about the lineage line of Noah's 3 daughters-in-law, and a carefully researched study of the lineage lines DOES show that all the giants that showed up after the flood came through Ham's line!

Also, in the Bible, the Promised land was said to be the 'land of the giants'!

Verses in Deuteronomy Amos and other places state the SIZE of those giants. The fact is, or it seems to me, when the spies came back and said, "We are like grasshoppers beside them..." they were being very serious.(If anyone wants a list of the scriptures concerning the 'size' of the giants, or that the Promised land WAS called 'the Land of the Giants', I'll be glad to pass them along, maybe in a PM so as not to take up too much room in the Articles forum.)

But, I do definitely lean towards the 'fallen angel' explanation.

Hi Judy. Thanks for weighing in. The angel view may very well be the correct explanation. As I said at the start, I'm not dogmatic about my view, and I don't rule out anything. Problem is, both views leave unanswered questions, and all we can do is piece the puzzle together, and try to see the picture with some of the pieces missing. I love a good open-minded discussion where the exchanges are not "emotional."

[edurda]

kahtar

Yes, the entities referred to as sons of God in Job 38 are angels. They are not fallen angels otherwise they would not be joyous before God they would be grumbling in the background or something.

My point is this (in reference to Job)... Satan was among the sons of God. If I were to write a book and say that Noah, among the animals, entered the Ark and etc... this would not be enough reason to assume that Noah was an animal. It simply means that Noah was among the animals when he entered the ark. I guess what I‘m trying to say is that it's possible that the author of Job meant for us to understand that the sons of God were presenting themselves to God and Satan in his cunning and crafty ways thought he could slip into His presence. And he is not a son of God but he figured that he could slip in with the group. This is pure speculation, I know, but this is one way to see it. Sorry if I sound like I’m obsessing over this key point.

Nobody denies the phrase “sons of God” refer to angels, but can't it also refer to man? I have a question. Are their other phrases that work this way also where they have dual meaning based on context but kinda mysterious as well.

I don't know how to address the idea of DNA manipulation or anything like that. You should write a book and make a movie about it and put the Gospel in somehow, I would buy a for all my co-workers. It sounds like one of those new age/aliens/end of world theories my co-workers tell me about. They believe that aliens, who Christians call demons or fallen angels, modified human DNA in the past and we are all coming up to another one-thousand years of enlightenment when the Mayan calendar resets and well realize the reason for the pyramids etc...

It's tempting to speculate further about this but I suppose it would explain some oddities in this world if I allowed it to. Is any more scripture found anywhere else about this topic in the bible?

[Redeemed by Grace]

I think this is as much a possibility as the others (now I have to add one to my list, .) I do have a question, but I'm not looking for you to answer it, only consider it (although if you do come up with an answer, please share ): If angels are able to and did 'possess' human men and subsequently mated with women, is that not still using the seed of man, and why would that then cause either physical giants, or powerful leader types?

Hi Kahtar,

Here's what I see within Scriptures and what I'm thinking.... There may not be a correlation between the possession of these angels within men as to being the off-spring of giants or powerful leaders. It might just be just a descriptor of another group of peoples around then and not a cause and effect by the disobedience of the sons of God, if I'm being clear here. Please allow me to try and explain further.

In careful reading of the text, the Nephilim, or strong men who dominate others - precedes the sons of God taking daughters of men, so the relationship is they are somewhere 'in the house' during this time when the sons of God came to the daughters of men, but the text doesn't say that the Nephilm were the fathers of these offspring, per se, just that they too were alive at this time, who were then known as the mighty men of old and renown within 6:4b, and not to the off-spring as stated in 6:4a. Thus these children, those who were born as a cause of the sons of God and these women, were wicked and evil continually, for which God then judges these angels and all of Mankind, less 8....

This might be difficult to follow, but hope it came across clear... The giants and powerful leaders preceded the union of the sons of God in men and procreation with their women... [for we know that angels don't marry nor do they reproduce themselves as God has given man to do].

And then as to giants--- it makes a bit of sense today that there are very tall people and very short people... and it wasn't because of the fallen angels, but because God made them as such.... However it's the sin of those angels that helped exacerbate the sin of mankind where as it was evil and continual, the judgement on both those angels for leaving their domain and on man for his continual evilness.

My 2cents... This is a very interesting passage to say the least, but 2 Peter 2:4,5 and Jude 6 help shed some light as to what Moses was telling us it means.

[Lone Arranger]

Kahtar, first of all thanks for the laughs - the ugly women thing.

But as far as genetic manipulations, what you said here, "...today scientists are able (and do) clone sheep and other creatures(no seed necessary, only the DNA is required). Animals are now able, through DNA manipulation, to grow human parts, or, mostly human parts. So seriously, fallen angels having reproductive capabilities is not even necessary for them to 'go in unto the daughters of men'."

I have to disagree with that being what happened simply because scripture states the reason they mated with human women was because they sexually desired them. While genetic manipulation would serve to corrupt the human race, no doubt a high priority of satan's, it wouldn't be a lust based decision which is what the scriptures state happened.

I've always wondered why they would lust after human women. Could it be another example of envy? "Look what God has made! A human that has the power to make more humans!," they might reason. Something satan could never do. He wanted to be like God, but only God could make humans. Maybe the lust was envy once again, the ability to create humans, that drove the fallen angels to mate with humans and produce their own corrupted type of human being in an attempt to be like God and to challenge Him. Of course it still doesn't explain how they could produce the required chromosomes.

I don't hold to the Book of Enoch as we have it. It's not part of cannon, but if any of what it says about this offspring is true then they were truly monsters indeed.

[Sojourner55]

Hi guys. Again, we have no clear, representative picture, because some key pieces of the puzzle are missing, leaving us to speculate as we try to fill in the blanks. As such, neither view is conclusive. Yet, I have to wonder: had we not been influenced by the Jewish traditions about fallen angels, would we have made that connection, and assumed angelic complicity? Or would we simply consider "the sons of God" in the same context that Adam is called the son of God--or as indeed, all human believers are? (Just a thought that occurred to me).

Regarding extra-Biblical sources as evidence for the fallen angel view (the Tanakh, Josephus, the book of Enoch, etc.): the accuracy and reliability of any part of these sources must be the standard by which we assess each as a whole. The Bible is held to this standard, and so should all other sources of reference: all or nothing. In that regard, while the book of Enoch was quoted by Jude, (nearly excluding it from the canon of Scripture), we should weigh the validity of its claim that the nephilim were well over 400 feet tall! That's over a hundred feet taller than the torch of the statue of liberty! One thing is certain: if the nephilim were that big, we can rule out their having fathered any children by human women. (Were there any female giants)?

Finally. we should remember that the nephilim are called "mighty men" (GIBBOR). This is the very term used to describe Nimrod, a grandson of Noah, and whose father Cush is presumed to be completely human. (Though we cannot rule out the genetic factor). The point is, the nephilim at least includes men of normal stature and appearance, while expanding the definition of nephilim to mean, men of great power and notoriety. ("larger than life?") Anyway, just a few points I thought I'd add to the discussion. Keep it going!

[Kahtar]

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Genesis 6:2
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Genesis 6:4
Lest confusion sets in, let's look at the words:
'sons of God' is translated from bene elohiym בניH1121 האלהיםH430 literally sons of gods
'daughters of men' is translated from bath adam בנותH1323 האדםH120 bath is literally the feminine of 1121 sons, thus daughters of human beings, mankind.
'fair' is translated from tob טבתH2896 literally good, ie a good man or good woman, also as an adverb beautiful, best, better, etc.
'giants' is translated from nephiyl הנפליםH5303 literally a feller, bully tyrant , and comes from the root word naphal, meaning fall, inferior.

In verse 2, in the Hebrew, The 'sons of God' appear to be set apart and distinct from the human beings and their offspring, which, coupled with the usage of the term in the book of Job would in itself lead one to consider the possibility that the 'sons of God' were not human beings.
The nephilim are the giants. They presumably are the offspring of the union of the sons of God and daughters of humans. And, from the word itself we learn that they, the offspring, are fallen. So not just the sons of God are fallen here, but the offspring as well.
As for clear sexual relations, it's not so clear in my mind. The sons of God 'came in unto' the daughters of men. The Hebrew suggests 'come near to', or 'come towards'. When compared to Adam and Eve, a different term is used in regard to sexual relations, and that is 'yada', to know. Adam 'knew' his wife, and she conceived.
It doesn't say clearly that the sons of God had sexual relations, or that they knew the daughters of men, it says they came near or towards them. So there is a difference. I'll leave it to your (carefully guarded) imaginations from there tho.

As for extra-Biblical references, they are, well, extra-Biblical, thus not cannon, thus not infallible. But, in this particular case, we have the brother of Jesus (one of Mary's other sons), and Peter, a very prominent Apostle of Christ, that are quoting the book of Enoch.
While Jude may have been questioned, and 'barely made it' into the cannon, Peter was not.
Since I had an external hard-drive crash, I do not currently have a copy of any of the translations of the purported Book of Enoch, so I cannot comment on the size of the angels in any of those translations. 400 feet seems a bit overboard, and honestly I don't remember reading that number in any of them, but again, I cannot say for sure.

[Sojourner55]

Kahtar, Here is the pertinent text from the book of Enoch, from a website I randomly selected from among several:

1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' 4. And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' 5. Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. 6. And they were in all two hundred; who descended ⌈in the days⌉ of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. 7. And these are the names of their leaders: Sêmîazâz, their leader, Arâkîba, Râmêêl, Kôkabîêl, Tâmîêl, Râmîêl, Dânêl, Êzêqêêl, Barâqîjâl, Asâêl, Armârôs, Batârêl, Anânêl, Zaqîêl, Samsâpêêl, Satarêl, Tûrêl, Jômjâêl, Sariêl. 8. These are their chiefs of tens.
(Enoch 6:1-8)

Enoch VII
1. And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. 2. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: 3. Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, 4. the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. 5. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. 6. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.
(Enoch 7:1-6)

An "ell" equals a cubit, and the Biblical cubit = 18 inches. At 3000 cubits, or 5400 feet, these guys would have stood over 3/4 of a mile high. Maybe this isn't supposed to be literal, but it's still outlandish--as is their devouring of mankind. There is a lot of strange stuff in here, considering it was cited by an apostle of Jesus. But then, there is some strange stuff in some ancient Jewish legends that would have been accepted in that day. Again, I'm not trying to undermine your view (though it may seem like it). It's just that if we are to gain any insight into the truth (if indeed we can), we have to see if our supports will hold up under critical scrutiny. Incidentally, her's a link to a scholarly article in the Jewish Encyclopedia, about three races of giants, of which the nephilim were only one. You might find it interesting.

[Kahtar]

Incidentally, her's a link to a scholarly article in the Jewish Encyclopedia, about three races of giants, of which the nephilim were only one. You might find it interesting.

Interesting article. I was aware of the different races.
One thing that this article clearly shows is that even the Hebrews did not agree on the issue, and that our current thoughts and surmisings have been around a a very long time.
1 mile = 5280 feet, thus 3000 ells is over a mile.

[Sojourner55]

Interesting article. I was aware of the different races.
One thing that this article clearly shows is that even the Hebrews did not agree on the issue, and that our current thoughts and surmisings have been around a a very long time. 1 mile = 5280 feet, thus 3000 ells is over a mile.

Oops. Didn't have my thinking cap on with the math there, did I? I'll tell you what though...if the sons of Anak had been that big, I think even Caleb and Joshua might have agreed with the rest of the spies. They really would have been like grasshoppers next to the giants!
And you're right: the nephilim debate has intrigued people for centuries; and they were as divided and uncertain as we are today.

[Curby Wheeler]

You are very well-spoken and present your argument very well, though I disagree with you.

The error some fall into is to assume that the "sons of God" were "angels". If it says they were sons of God, why does anybody jump to the conclusion they were angels? They were sons of God, not angels.

Just look at the untold number of living beings just on earth! Why do people jump to the wholesale conclusion that there's only one kind of heavenly being? The Greek word for angel literally means messenger. As a matter of fact, it's translated messenger a number of times because sometimes it clearly doesn't refer to a heavenly being.

Luke tells us that Adam was a son of God. He was a direct creation of God, was appointed a dominion, was obligated to obey his sovereign creator and he was granted free-will. Are these the characteristics of other sons of God? Possibly.

We now know there are literally trillions of stars! Is Elohim limited in his creative capacity? Heck no! Just look at the variety of life just on earth! Did he create life elsewhere in this vast universe? Heck yeah, it says so in Genesis 6, it refers to sons of God that mated with daughters of men.

It says giants were born unto them. I have personally seen the skeleton of a 12 foot man. Extraordinarily tall human skeletons are well-documented in archeology. They're not discussed much because they contradict the theory-tale of evolution, but they're part of the archeological record nonetheless.

God told Adam and Eve that the "seed of the woman" would be the instrument through whom salvation would come.

If you were the one who tempted Eve to sin, wouldn't you want to corrupt the genetic makeup of the human race so the prophecy could never be fulfilled? After all, if the seed of womankind is mingled with DNA from other sons of God, that would make the prophecy moot, wouldn't it?

You will notice that Noah was "pure in his generations". Big clue! He and his family had not mingled with the insurgent sons of God.

Only Noah and his family were preserved through the flood. Yes, after the flood, another attempt was made to corrupt the seed of mankind, but God saw to it that it was also thwarted.

Anyway, that's my view. God bless.